Smith & Wesson .357 magnum revolver

[Caveman Jim]

My friend asked me to keep an eye out for said pistol above, 2" BBl with an aluminum frame. Is he correct? I have never heard of one although I am not a revolver owner.
Ant help appreciated. Jim Sr.

Read More

 

[Caveman Jim]

That's what I was telling him. He said his wife will only shoot .38's but still that has got to have some kick to it still.
Thanks for the reply (Tits)... Oh that is just wrong... Sorry man!!!

 

[Certaindeaf]

Most people that get those never hardly shoot magnums out of them.. why bother if you're only going to shoot .38's out of it?
Get a steel 2" Smith for magnums.

 

[duane black]

Get a steel 2" Smith for magnums.

Hard to beat a model 60 magnum. One of the very few guns I regret selling, out of many. I keep threatening myself that I am going to ditch the glock and pick another one up for carry.

Never seen a aluminum framed magnum other than the scandium alloy models mentioned above.

 

[Mezzovex]

340 (concealed hammer) or 360 (exposed hammer) are 2" scandium frame and titanium cylinder J-frames. FYI 357 in either gun will be no fun to shoot.

It's actually not that bad

 

[Certaindeaf]

I'd check out the Ruger LCR.. it weighs a pound and the Smith weighs like 11oz?
I've not shot the Smith's but know that the scandium/ti Smith .38's kick about just right with +P's.

 

[orygun]

Had a stainless Smith .357 649 and I only shot it with Magnums. It's was a painful little bugger to shoot. (but I shot the heck out of it anyway!) Can't imagine what it would be like to shoot a similar gun that weighs about 1/2 of that one.
My wife has a 642 Airweight 38 Special. Not too bad.

 

[soberups]

It has nothing to do with pain, and everything to do with the ability of the shooter to control the recoil of the weapon well enough to make fast, accurate followup shots. Which, in my opinion, is pretty much impossible to do with an airwieght .357 snubbie.

The other issue is ballistics. A 2" barrel is too short to utilize all the additional powder of a .357 magnum round, so you wind up with blinding muzzle flash from that unburned powder plus deafening muzzle blast in exchange for very little increase in velocity compared to an identical weight bullet in .38+P.

I own a steel-framed Taurus 651 snub nosed 357. Even with the additional weight of the steel frame, the recoil from Magnum rounds is too much for me and I am a big guy with big hands. So I keep it loaded with .38+P hollowpoints and it serves as a nightstand gun. I also have a Ruger LCR in .38+P which is what I carry in the summer. Even with its alloy frame, it has less felt recoil with 38+P rounds than my Taurus does with magnums. The .38+P is a proven performer and an effective choice for self defense, I dont see any benefit at all in trying to load Magnum rounds in an airweight snub.

 

[unklekippy]

The shortest .357 that is worth a damn is 3" and then it is only "better" in that it is easier to carry. I personally draw the line with my revolvers at 4". To each his own, of course. As has been stated, in a 2" the only thing .357 is doing over .38 is blinding you and possibly starting a fire.

The .38+P that I trust are Federal 129 grain Hydra-Shok.

 

[soberups]

Chambering an airweight snub revolver in .357 makes about as much sense to me as stuffing a turbocharged, 400 horsepower V-8 into the front of a Toyota Corolla with stock tires and suspension. You'll make lots of noise and smoke, but when you try putting your foot into it you will have a really hard time keeping the car out of the ditch. After awhile, you will come to realise that the car did its job of getting you back and forth to work just as quickly when it had the 4-cylinder in it as it does now.

 

[Netspirit]

I don't get why .357 still exists to begin with. It makes you deaf if shot indoors, it kicks like a mule, and is not any more effective in real-world situations than, say, a modern 9mm.

 

[unklekippy]

I don't get why .357 still exists to begin with. It makes you deaf if shot indoors, it kicks like a mule, and is not any more effective in real-world situations than, say, a modern 9mm.

I'm sorry, but do you have ANY understanding of ballistics? A 9mm pushing a 115gr. projectile at 1,200 fps or .357 pushing a 158 at 1,400fps. You don't have to like it, but to even compare shows a huge lack of understanding.

What is questionable in it's existence is 9mm. With new .380 projectiles and the obvious superiority of the .40S&W or .45ACP renders it useless.

Dude, my wife carries a .45ACP. Knocking the .357 is blasphemy. When you were all searching the desert for 9mm, I was casting my own bullets and shooting them much more accurately and much more powerfully than ANY 9mm ever could. If anyone cares to bring up capacity, A Ruger Blackhawk or S&W 27 is very easy to reload and I would rather face 15 little 9mm's than 6 .357's. It is a man's gun, lauded by the likes of Skelton, Keith, Taffin, Askins Jr., Jordan and Metcalf.

 

[duane black]

Knocking the .357 is blasphemy.

THIS ! BLASPHEMER !



The 357 for a hand loader can be a interesting cartridge.

 

[unklekippy]

I'm not sure which one of these statements makes less sense.

That's a joke, right? A .357 has so much more use than a 9mm, it's laughable. A 9mm is what I would give my grandmother, not a man.

 

[oknow]

Originally Posted by Netspirit
I don't get why .357 still exists to begin with. It makes you deaf if shot indoors, it kicks like a mule, and is not any more effective in real-world situations than, say, a modern 9mm.

Originally Posted by unklekippy
What is questionable in it's existence is 9mm. With new .380 projectiles and the obvious superiority of the .40S&W or .45ACP renders it useless.

I'm not sure which one of these statements makes less sense.

I personally would say the first one, just my .02 worth

 

[unklekippy]

9mm is the preferred caliber for those that are scared of a real gun. Those that talk of a 9mm expanding must realize that a .45 will never be less than .45".

 

[unklekippy]

Now I am being offensive. The 9mm is and will be a fine weapon when loaded properly. Those that make the decision to arm our military with 9mm are scared of the recoil of the .45. In reality, soldiers end up searching for the .45 and .308 once the 9mm and 5.56 zip through Haji's vest 8 times, giving him plenty of time to gun down a few of your friends and running 2 miles down the road before he chokes to death on his own blood.

These types of arguments have and will go on forever. A larger slug moving as fast or faster than a 9mm seems to be the ticket for me. To each their own.

 

[Certaindeaf]

I think it's conceded that the .357 has about the best record as a "stopper".. using a good, hot-loaded 125 grain HP. A good 115 grain HP 9mm, preferably loaded to +P+, is not far behind.. and you get, in some cases, twenty rounds per mag, instead of just six for the revolver.
Scared, feh. Get a clue.

 

[unklekippy]

I have many clues. Also, a keen understanding of ballistics. The .357 blows so far past the 9mm it isn't funny. That was the original comparison that got out of hand. I believe it started with someone questioning why the greatest revolver round ever still exists. The comparison is apples & oranges, but since the 9mm is outclassed by so many rounds in a semi-auto, why compare it to a revolver round with so much more power?

+P+? You have to do that to your gun just to make it appear that it can be on the same page as the .357 while hamstringing the .357 to 125's. I'll take a 158 any day.

Anyway, this thread is on a .357 mag 2" revolver. What does that have to do with my grandma's semi-auto?

 

[Certaindeaf]

.I'll take a 158 any day.

Well then you'd be hamstrung.